Pacharra Marlene, Kleinbeck Stefan, Schäper Michael, Blaszkewicz Meinolf, Golka Klaus, van Thriel Christoph
Leibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors at the TU Dortmund University, Ardeystrasse 67, 44139 Dortmund, Germany.
Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2017 Jul;220(5):840-848. doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2017.03.013. Epub 2017 Apr 2.
Allergic inflammation in the upper airways represents a wide-spread health issue: Little is known about whether it increases sensitivity to airborne chemicals thereby challenging established exposure limits that neglect such differences in susceptibility. To investigate the role of pre-existing allergic inflammation, 19 subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and 18 control subjects with low risk of sensitization were exposed for 4h to ammonia in two concentrations (cross-over design): 2.5ppm (odor threshold) and 0-40ppm (occupational exposure limit: 20ppm TWA). Prior to the whole-body exposure, it was confirmed that subjects with SAR showed persistent inflammation outside the pollen season as indicated by increased exhaled nitric oxide and total immunoglobulin E in serum compared to controls. Despite concentration-dependent increases in chemosensory perceptions and acute symptoms, SAR status did not modulate subjective effects of exposure. Moreover, SAR status did not affect the investigated physiological endpoints of sensory irritation: While eye-blink recordings confirmed weak ocular irritation properties of ammonia at 0-40ppm, this effect was not enhanced in SAR subjects compared to controls. Irrespective of SAR status, exposure to 0-40ppm ammonia did not result in a cortisol stress response, objective nasal obstruction as measured with anterior active rhinomanometry, or an inflammatory response as indexed by substance P, tumor-necrosis-factor α, and high-mobility-group protein 1 in nasal lavage fluid. At least for the malodorous compound ammonia, these results do not support the hypothesis that SAR enhances chemosensory effects in response to local irritants. Before generalizing this finding, more compounds as well as sensitization to perennial allergens need to be investigated.
对于它是否会增加对空气传播化学物质的敏感性,进而挑战忽视易感性差异的既定接触限值,我们知之甚少。为了研究预先存在的过敏性炎症的作用,19名季节性变应性鼻炎(SAR)患者和18名低致敏风险的对照受试者在两种浓度下(交叉设计)暴露于氨气4小时:2.5ppm(气味阈值)和0 - 40ppm(职业接触限值:20ppm时间加权平均值)。在全身暴露之前,已证实与对照组相比,SAR患者呼出一氧化氮增加和血清总免疫球蛋白E升高,表明在花粉季节之外存在持续性炎症。尽管化学感觉和急性症状呈浓度依赖性增加,但SAR状态并未调节暴露的主观效应。此外,SAR状态并未影响所研究的感觉刺激的生理终点:虽然眨眼记录证实了0 - 40ppm氨气对眼睛有微弱的刺激作用,但与对照组相比,这种效应在SAR患者中并未增强。无论SAR状态如何,暴露于0 - 40ppm氨气均未导致皮质醇应激反应、用前鼻主动鼻阻力计测量的客观鼻阻塞,或鼻灌洗液中P物质、肿瘤坏死因子α和高迁移率族蛋白1所指示的炎症反应。至少对于恶臭化合物氨气,这些结果不支持SAR会增强对局部刺激物的化学感觉效应这一假设。在推广这一发现之前需要研究更多的化合物以及对常年性过敏原的致敏情况。